I don't call one a brahman for being born of a mother (a child of certain Brahma) or sprung from a womb. (a child of a certain Bahma real, culture)

He's called a 'bho-sayer' (bho=yes and use from more sublime to address normal people: one using the language of real judges, yet not arrived at such position)if he has anything at all. (outwardly refuges, identifications)

That means if one still holds such as certain birth, nationality, stand, identification, "I-making, mine-making". Sakaya-ditthi, identification with signs of the 5/6 senses, and conceit in a refined sphere. One who lifts or belittle or identify oneself as either lower, higher, equal, the three kinds of conceit.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

His attachments, his homes, can't be found.Through knowinghe is unperplexed,has come ashorein the Deathless: he's what I call a brahman.

If he recites many teachings, but — heedless man —doesn't do what they say,like a cowherd counting the cattle of others,he has no share in the contemplative life.

If he recites next to nothingbut follows the Dhammain line with the Dhamma; abandoning passion, aversion, delusion; alert, his mind well-released, not clinging either here or hereafter:he has his share in the contemplative life.

"Our Bhante Bhikkhu Subhuti comes to mind... because it's very pointing on the common tendency one not free from sakkayaditthi but tending in the other direction, to be caught in defining one self on very raw level and even with what is total against ones "current birth", tradition: here also a (one of many, just a given, send, one) "western sample" of an American Monk...": "I recently legally changed my name to Bhante Bhikkhu ..."

It feels so right to have my passport match who I identify with and I am very happy to have this day finally come.

Aloha,

Bhante Bhikkhu Subhūti

"Boh..?"

You would not have believe such, would you? That's real heavy Sakhaya Ditthi... even to identify one self far away from what is called Khema but even most violent, or?

Atma has to remember a situation while walking back from Phnom Penh, near the Vinaya monastery in Kampong Chnang. Resting short in a monastery a young novice addressed my person "cool", eating his sugar can peace at the same time. "Where are you from, housholder?", he asked. My person asked why addressing one, even older, in this manner. "I am a member of the Sangha!", the 10 years old child answered, enjoying his peace of sugar-branch attended by a mental sick householder. "Oh well, time to go on."

If it would be that funny for them, it would be place to laugh. If it would be sad, then it might be a place to lose a tear. That is why the words "he is a tear" is used often by the Buddha for wrong grasping someone.

Now what does oneself still cling on "mothers" and "wombs"? For it's hard to even help one self out, how then others not freed.

"'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.' The thought occurs to him, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now. Then why not me?' Then he eventually abandons conceit, having relied on conceit. 'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said.

and not only for a Streamwinner but for all Noble Ones, such as sakkāyadiṭṭhi or selfidentification view going together with doubt and here the matter also the saṁyojana of clinging to mere rules and ritual (sīlabbata-parāmāsa; see upādāna), or desire, is no more present since having "changed the ancestor-ship" of those seeking after a stand (view), jeat,ជាត​ (jāti: birth, nationality, stand), to jea, ជាត (jā:be, being).

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

“The birth of beings belonging to this or that order of beings, their being born, their conception (okkanti) and springing into existence, the manifestation of the groups (corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations, consciousness; see khandha), the acquiring of their sensitive organs: this is called birth”DN 22

Once having loosen the hold on the Khandhas, having seen Dhamma for oneself, such raw ideas of being this or that, holding on certain groups, nations, kind of birth, ... is total pointless in regard of refined definitions: as there are causes effects, there is no such as being, or not being.

One could say such a persons sees not a Bhikkhu, but one who does (acccording what results in what is meant by) Bhikkhu, One who bhikkhus. Or one does not see a Khmer (khema), but One who do khema, or did khema, if seeing.

So one does not become a bhikkhu, bhikkhuni, khmer by having been given birth by a mother, preceptor, or by law, but by deeds. Even one has a Khmer (in the sense of meaning of Khmer) passport, if he does not act khmer (khema, one at peace, a refuge) he/she can not be said to be a real Khmer.Now think on the "joke" of Monks carry and hold monk-identification papers. That's a householder (in the deeper meaning of sense), a worldling, one maintaining a stand (jati, jeat) and then there are even the gross fools who hold on such as nationality or Nikaya or what ever identification.

A Khmer (khema) monk, or Khmer nun act-ually means acting as a Noble One acts and can be called also member of the Sangha, the Sangha of the Noble Ones.

Traditional outwardly things, cultures, are given by Brahmas of the first level, ones parents, ones society, ones leaders, but tradition of the Noble ones can not be given, but has to be seen by one self. Yet more admirable Brahmas, friends, may be able to point that out with their ways of conduct, to see for oneself the Dhamma, reality.

There are of cause good and bad cultures, parenthoods, in regard of reaching the aim of liberation, but it is not a security that one of a certain parenthood would gain the Noble domain or a good, or better. To understand this, Atma likes to cite a sutta:

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

"There are these four types of people to be found existing in the world. Which four? One in darkness who is headed for darkness, one in darkness who is headed for light, one in light who is headed for darkness, and one in light who is headed for light.

"And how is one the type of person in darkness who is headed for darkness? There is the case where a person is born into a lowly family — the family of a scavenger, a hunter, a basket-weaver, a wheelwright, or a sweeper — a family that is poor, with little food or drink, living in hardship, where food & clothing are hard to come by. And he is ugly, misshapen, stunted, & sickly: half-blind or deformed or lame or crippled. He doesn't receive any [gifts of] food, drink, clothing, or vehicles; garlands, perfumes, or ointments; bedding, shelter, or lamps. He engages in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct. Having engaged in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct, he — on the break-up of the body, after death — reappears in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. This is the type of person in darkness who is headed for darkness.

"And how is one the type of person in darkness who is headed for light? There is the case where a person is born into a lower class family — the family of a scavenger, a hunter, a basket-weaver, a wheelwright, or a sweeper — a family that is poor, with little food or drink, living in hardship, where food & clothing are hard to come by. And he is ugly, misshapen, stunted, & sickly: half-blind or deformed or lame or crippled. He doesn't receive any [gifts of] food, drink, clothing, or vehicles; garlands, perfumes, or ointments; bedding, shelter, or lamps. He engages in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct. Having engaged in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct, he — on the break-up of the body, after death — reappears in the good destination, the heavenly world. This is the type of person in darkness who is headed for light.

"And how is one the type of person in light who is headed for darkness? There is the case where a person is born into an upper class family — a noble warrior family, a priestly family, a prosperous householder family — a family that is rich, with much wealth, with many possessions, with a great deal of money, a great many accoutrements of wealth, a great many commodities. And he is well-built, handsome, extremely inspiring, endowed with a lotus-like complexion. He receives [gifts of] food, drink, clothing, & vehicles; garlands, perfumes, & ointments; bedding, shelter, & lamps. He engages in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct. Having engaged in bodily misconduct, verbal misconduct, & mental misconduct, he — on the break-up of the body, after death — reappears in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. This is the type of person in light who is headed for darkness.

"And how is one the type of person in light who is headed for light? There is the case where a person is born into an upper class family — a noble warrior family, a priestly family, a prosperous householder family — a family that is rich, with much wealth, with many possessions, with a great deal of money, a great many accoutrements of wealth, a great many commodities. And he is well-built, handsome, extremely inspiring, endowed with a lotus-like complexion. He receives [gifts of] food, drink, clothing, & vehicles; garlands, perfumes, & ointments; bedding, shelter, & lamps. He engages in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct. Having engaged in good bodily conduct, good verbal conduct, & good mental conduct, he — on the break-up of the body, after death — reappears in the good destination, the heavenly world. This is the type of person in light who is headed for light.

"These are the four types of people to be found existing in the world."

So in meanings of real wealth, or worldly wealth: It does not at least matter where one has been born or is currently bond to, of where he might go. So it happens that a far foreigner, say a western Punkrocker, could become a real Khema Monk, or Khemakumara, while a Khmer born monk act-ually becomes a western/modern Punkrocker. The same, in reagard of merely outwardly identifications counts for woman or man as well. Woman born have just one "not possible", to become a Buddha (an Arahat able to teach the Dhamma when it has gone lost).

The more foolish a society becomes and try to define things by simply rupa, outwardly things, the harder it may become to get in contact of what is not just outwardly fake.

As the talk with Nyom Sophoeun was about the Nuns of Maha Panna Foundation and she told that it is hard to really respect them, charring so many "Mahayana" cultural things. The question here is whether one currently is willing to let go of the dark and go toward the white, or if one likes to create a fake, putting on a certain outwardly appearence and actually go after wordily gain, works for the world and its ordinary societies.

As the Buddha told a King, it's specially hard for householder (actually only a Noble one knows if another tends or is as well) to know whether a recluse is really one or a certain hireling for the world and so it is very needed to know another very well as the Seclution- Sutta points out. Found also in

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

'That's how it is when living together in the world. That's how it is when gaining a personal identity.[1] (atta-bhava, literally "self-state")

Foolish acting people, like a Austria proverb says "Farmers eat just what they know", meaning those holding the Uposatha of the Cowboys, cow-wards, go just about outwardly things after what they know. So Buddhist all over the world say mostly "he does not speak as pleasant (because used to that food) as our monks", or "what should I gain from him, not even speaking our language well".

People with strong attachments to outwardly things are most not open to the real Dhamma. One should ask one self, "how would he/she be able to speak or act in ways we are used to, if nobody learned it his/her?". How could Atma read, listen and speak Khmer if there would not have been generous acts? How could disciple gain ways of a noble tradition, if a teacher, ones preceptor, is actually a "modern punk rocker" just wearing outwardly things. It all gets total confused. Housholder acting as if they would be monks, and monks acting as if housholder... Thats how the Dhamma disapears.

So it's in relation of the reason of this topic very important only to give others the possibility to learn ones ways be living, trading... together, but also to be willing to get others known and provide them with outwardly things they might lack. Of course, if one likes to hold on a certain nationality, wordily tradition or just like to use it for a livelihood, thats not a field of merits, but if one actually tend in the right direction, it is of great benefit to provide with such as learning language, traditional ways, customs, of the cultures willing to follow the Noble Ones or even directly the Noble Ones. So it's also important to know of what is just a current custom of worldlings and what is actually the Buddhas Vinaya.

Western Monks in western lands are mostly corrupt in regard of livelihood as well. Having gone back, they still having identity desire, holding on stands, rights and social insurances... and to provide such, they act so that they are beloved from donors in their way. Wordlings making merits with worldling... The same can easy happen in the old countries as well. Since leader or precepters are after power and gain, they would keep their students as attraction for potent donors. To get their money, one mostly needs to attract them on self-identification, useless rites ...

My person wishes that those tending in the same direction find together and recognize each other, helping each other with that of one might lack of and one has. And what a deal if just lower ones head and provide a beggar with outwardly things? Possible to open ones door for going forth one day for one self?

And one may say Atma lifted himself using to point on foolish act of fellows to just belittle them. That would be wrong grasped, since it is sometimes a compassion that people fear to do, like the child honestly did by pointing on the The Emperor's New Clothes .

So the (Khmer) Tipitaka transcription started with this Sutta, because there is nearly no more Dhamma-Dana, but just livelihood-exchanges, given in this world, possible just for someone standing outwardly of any worldly society, one with no outwardly Nissaya and only that of the Gems:

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

[Cunda the smith:]"I ask the sage of abundant discernment,awakened, lord of the Dhamma, freeof craving, supremeamong two-legged beings, bestof charioteers: "How many contemplatives are there in the world? Please tell me."

[The Buddha:]"Four contemplatives, Cunda. There isn't a fifth.Being asked face-to-face, I'll explain: the Victor of the path, the teacher of the path, one who lives by the path, & one who corrupts the path."

[Cunda:]"Whom do the Awakenedcall the Victor of the path[&] one who is an unequalled teacher of the path?Tell me the one who lives by the path,and explain to me one who corrupts the path."

[The Buddha:]"He's crossed over perplexity,his arrow removed,delighting in Unbinding, freeof greed,the leader of the world with its devas: one like this the Awakened call the Victor of the path.

He here knows the foremost as foremost,who right here shows & analyzes the Dhamma,that sage, a cutter-of-doubt unperturbed: he's called the second of monks, the teacher of the path.

Mindful, restrained,he lives by the well-taught Dhamma-principles, path,associating with principles without blame: he's called the third of monks, one who lives by the path.

Creating a counterfeitof those with good practices,self-asserting, a corrupter of families,[1] intrusive,deceitful, unrestrained, chaff,going around in disguise: he's one who corrupts the path.

Any householder, having ferreted these out — a discerning disciple of those who are noble —knowing they aren't all the same,seeing this, his conviction's not harmed.For how could the corrupt with the un- corrupt, the impure with the pure, be put on a par?"Note

1.A corrupter of families is a monk who ingratiates himself into a family's affections by performing services for them that are inappropriate for a monk to do, thus diverting their faith away from those who live by the Dhamma and Vinaya. For more on this term, see The Buddhist Monastic Code, Sanghadisesa 13.

It's hard when living near fools and daily getting such statements like only if one asked for going forth like we (our group) are using to cite it in Pali, one can become a homeless under the Buddha. If such is even a preceptor of one, well: very hard. Even if people carry out outwardly things, but to dwell with people and even trade with them, with strong wrong view, Atma has to walk on, while to stay in the house of a householder would be possible for a short while. Beware of culture-thieves with not wise views.

Again, to leave house cot be given, but has a cause by seeing for oneself. Inwardly and outwardly, and by that open to everyone. A trainee structure by the Sangha of the Buddha might be also still available, at least to the extend till one really lefts home and then has already learned the outwardly customs as well, when inwardly having changed ones Ancestor-ship. That's great and should be used and maintained as long as possible.

Now this kind of liberality of Noble Ones, if just intellectually and wrong grasped, quickly turns out into the modern western Uposatha of the Jains, marxism and pseudoliberalism providing for a punch of additional kinds of conceit and harm for many. So one should be careful not to tend to become just a Ahara-hat as well, sitting in house and glad about ones "liberal stand" and since this is much more harmful for long time, it's of course better to stick with the traditions of the old, the boat as long as still existing.

Wrong modesty is also huge pride (stand, that hinders moving on, leaving it, this home). So one should not try to escape something requiring scarifies by saying "but I am just this and that..." or like devoted often say "but I/we are just worldlings, ordinary people". It's much better to think in ways of "Hey, he/she is not even Khema outwardly, from foreign place, yet Khema. Why I, who is born in this Domain outwardly, should not be able to gain as well" and that has no akusala desire within, such as issa or what ever. Only be strong desire, and seeing others can can, one moves, Saddha arises. If making ones objects of refuge somehow "equal" then why walking on?

"May Venerable gain highest liberation", should not be a releasing wish, but binding joy something one desires to follow. So a practice metta toward liberated people, or moving toward it, is not good if using it as release but beloved should be the starter when practicing metta, and having the factor gratitude in it, it pulls one toward path and Unbound.

"'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.' The thought occurs to him, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now. Then why not me?' Then he eventually abandons conceit, having relied on conceit. 'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said.

When meeting people having really gone from states into statelessness, that is much different as to associate with likewise bond where upholding and maintaining a certain state, use it for livelihood, has more priority as right view and virtue and for the most involving many conflicts. And if being really stateless is not something seen fast, relaying on outwardly things, not something one just can talk about while still holding on outwardly refuges, rights & refrigerator.

"as free as a bird, not bound.", Vogelfrei , was originally a blessing but has become something most ugly for "Brahmans". The Buddha used to defend being called an outcast by defining it clearly... today most have bond them even harder then at the Buddhas times to Brahmanism and Cast-systems, although thinking being more free by doing the duties of those holding on states (jeat).

As if one would do good or bad by birth, state or because living at home or somewhere in the land, having a state of just a wanderer. No state is free of not breaking soon apart even if doing mostly good.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

One whose beyond or not-beyond or beyond-&-not-beyondcan't be found; unshackled, carefree: he's what I call a brahman.

...might be that some still carry certain unusual habits with them, owing that toward their teacher or desired teacher. For old fellows nothing but annoying as well, this state between. That is why someone outwardly might be different to other fellows behavior around. That's, this "love" is also what pulls one out into the free. But when observing anothers changes good, one can see whether one is up to or have left home or just trying to use the Noble Domain for another house, state. Khema are very open and not that much attached to jati generally, do not close up because simply of this and welcome all doing well or wishing to learn, let others also go their ways they think leading to lasting happiness.

It's good and proper pride that keeps one maintaining a boot of culture if it is on ones skillful deeds and habits.

Even if living with family and children, or outwardly bound by old duties, one can become free as a bird. But if not having such, yet still without wings of mind, it's much better to life among those train to gain the wings of awakening (bodhi-pakkhiya-dhamma ).

Once on has entered the training, become a Sekha, having reached the Sotapanna-magga, ones is able to train the Noble Eightfold path for further fruits and maggas till final liberation, Nyom.

The Noble Eightfold path is the classic set of "Wings of Awakening", but the Buddha gave also additional renderings for different kind people or states and so there are this seven sets , when developed fully leading to the phala, fruit.

Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa

"So this is what you think of me: 'The Blessed One, sympathetic, seeking our well-being, teaches the Dhamma out of sympathy.' Then you should train yourselves — harmoniously, cordially, and without dispute — in the qualities I have pointed out, having known them directly: the four frames of reference, the four right exertions, the four bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, the noble eightfold path."

Quote from: MN 103

The "easiest" set, which the Buddha taught his son, The Four Right Exertions (sammappadhāna), right effort, is possible the easiest to match, once knowing what is good and what is bad and not much need for study or explaining as well.

Was the not understanding just a matter of different used words, or was it deeper about the similarities of this wings and there differences, which Bhante Thanissaro wonderful worked out in his book on the Wings of Awakening, "bodhi-pakkhiya-dhamma".

Some teachers and their students have inclination on "The Five Faculties (indrīya), or Bala". Those very inclined to sitting meditation, Yogies, love to use the "The Seven Factors for Awakening (bojjhaṅga)". Classical Vipassana "fanatics" swear that only "The Four Frames of Reference (satipaṭṭhāna)" is the way, but all meat each other and give the Noble Eigthfold path in different aspects of view and inclination.

One can also say different in domination of focus on one kind of pathfactor, once one of the 7+right view as always included in samma is met, the whole path has developed. So one on focus on right concentration loves the bojjhaṅga set. Those much on virtue the sammappadhāna-set... Right resolve: satipaṭṭhāna... but at least different for all one which wishing to remember intensively.

Surposed a child does not go to school yet, is it called student? When it enters the school actually then it is called student. So it's not wrong when saying the School teaches all children, is for all, but just those who enter it are called students and on the way to finish it.

Buddhānussati: "teacher for those ready/willing to be taimed", independent of stand, race, social status, gender, age, human or Deva... yet, one following it is bond to become a Noble One, just by "only" having Saddha toward the Dhamma, or understanding it intelectually. And someone, coming in touch with the Dhamma of a Buddha has act-ually Upanissaya toward it already hardly build up, is act-ually currently already rich.

Even by not capable to gain path in a certain existence, thinking on "animals" or "Petas", the association would nurish the needed Upanissaya. To be capable to hear the Dhamma proper one has to gain a human or Deva state an leaving home to an extent of being in a borderland to release (accessconcentration).

Again, the Buddha teaches not such as a linear pattern of Kamma, but has seen that ones future is not determined just by past but that the great opportunity lies in the present actions, every moment a possibility, will, to even change Ancestorship or go beyond.

Where ever ones mind tends to, one arrives at it. Seeing the worth of Noble Ones, one is destinated to become oneself. Being inclined to fake Brahmas, wearing outwardly signs, yet act not Noble at all, having no Silas, desire for a stand and class, likewise.

A person meeting Noble Ones, the/a Buddha his monastic and lay disciples, and simply rejoice on seeing that there are those on the walk or having arrived, is a person with Upanissaya toward the Noble Ones, can be assumed to soon hear the good Dhamma, hearing it, become bond to liberation.

Getting in touch is either a matter of past or present actions. Past gives the possibility, current to action. Like no one can force, had forced Nyom to ever come to Aural. Others, even next and near, are incapable because attracted to Maras games, holding them for a refuge, nicca, atta and sukha.

Simply by taking refuge by heard one becomes a disciple of the Noble ones, not breaking up, one is destinated to become a Sekha, become an Asekha at least.

If it would be not possible, like the Brahman taught at Buddhas time, saying one is because of certain birth, the Buddha, a former not Noble, just a Bodhisatta, would not have taught the Dhamma, but because it is possible just by "ordinary" human effort, he taught, his discriples teach.

So one should not rest in either certain conceit by improper modesty or in the Brahmans wrong view of particulary eternity.

5. “There ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos devolves. When the cosmos is devolving, beings for the most part head toward the Radiant (brahmās). There they stay: mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time. Then there ultimately comes a time when, with the passing of a long stretch of time, this cosmos evolves. When the cosmos is evolving, an empty Brahmā palace appears. Then a certain being—from the exhaustion of his life span or the exhaustion of his merit[8]—falls from the company of the Radiant and re-arises in the empty Brahmā palace. And there he still stays mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.

“After dwelling there alone for a long time, he experiences displeasure & agitation: ‘O, if only other beings would come to this world!’

“Then other beings, through the ending of their life span or the ending of their merit, fall from the company of the Radiant and reappear in the Brahmā palace, in the company of that being. And there they still stay mind-made, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, coursing through the air, established in beauty for a long stretch of time.

“Then the thought occurs to the being who reappeared first: ‘I am Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer & Ruler, Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be.[9] These beings were created by me. Why is that? First the thought occurred to me, “O, if only other beings would come to this world!” And thus my direction of will brought these beings to this world.’ As for the beings who reappeared later, this thought occurs to them: ‘This is Brahmā… Father of All That Have Been & Shall Be. We were created by this Brahmā. Why is that? We saw that he appeared here before, while we appeared after.’ The being who reappeared first is of longer life span, more beautiful, & more influential, while the beings who reappeared later are of shorter life span, less beautiful, & less influential.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘We were created by Brahmā, the Great Brahmā, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. He is constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But we who have been created by him—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the first basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos...

6. “As for the second: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Play.[10] They spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness becomes muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, they fall from that company of devas.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted by play don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, their mindfulness doesn’t become muddled. Because of unmuddled mindfulness, they don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted by play spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play. Because we spent an excessive amount of time indulging in the delights of laughter & play, our mindfulness became muddled. Because of muddled mindfulness, we fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the second basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

7. “As for the third: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There are, monks, devas called Corrupted by Mind. They spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another.[11] Because they spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds become corrupted toward one another. Because they are corrupted in mind toward one another, they grow exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. They fall from that company of devas.

“Now, there is the possibility, monks, that a certain being, having fallen from that company, comes to this world. Having come to this world, he goes forth from the home life into homelessness. Having gone forth from the home life into homelessness, he—through ardency, through exertion, through commitment, through heedfulness, through right attention—touches an awareness- concentration such that in his concentrated mind he recollects that former life, but nothing prior to that. He says, ‘Those honorable devas who are not corrupted in mind don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because they don’t spend an excessive amount of time staring at one another, their minds don’t become corrupted toward one another. Because they are uncorrupted in mind toward one another, they don’t grow exhausted in body or exhausted in mind. They don’t fall from that company. They are constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity. But those of us who were corrupted in mind spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another. Because we spent an excessive amount of time staring at one another, our minds became corrupted toward one another. Because we were corrupted in mind toward one another, we grew exhausted in body & exhausted in mind. We fell from that company and—inconstant, impermanent, short-lived, subject to falling—have come to this world.’

“This is the third basis—with reference to which, coming from which—some contemplatives & brahmans are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos.

8. “As for the fourth: With reference to what, coming from what, are contemplatives & brahmans partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos?

“There is the case where a certain contemplative or brahman is a logician, an inquirer. He states his own improvisation, hammered out by logic, deduced from his inquiries: ‘That which is called “eye” & “ear” & “nose” & “tongue” & “body”: That self is inconstant, impermanent, non-eternal, subject to change. But that which is called “mind” or “intellect” or “consciousness”: That self is constant, permanent, eternal, not subject to change, and will remain just like that for eternity.’[12]

“These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos, they all do so on one or another of these four grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

...These, monks, are the contemplatives & brahmans who are partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos on four grounds. And whatever contemplatives & brahmans who partially eternalists and partially non-eternalists, who proclaim a partially eternal and partially non-eternal self & cosmos, they all do so on one or another of these four grounds. There is nothing outside of this.

“With regard to this, the Tathāgata discerns that ‘These standpoints, thus seized, thus grasped at, lead to such & such a destination, to such & such a state in the world beyond.’ That the Tathāgata discerns. And he discerns what is higher than that. And yet, discerning that, he does not grasp at it. And as he is not grasping at it, unbinding [nibbuti] is experienced right within. Knowing, as they have come to be, the origination, ending, allure, & drawbacks of feelings, along with the escape from feelings, the Tathāgata, monks—through lack of clinging/sustenance—is released.

“These, monks, are the dhammas—deep, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise—that the Tathāgata proclaims, having directly known & realized them for himself, and that those who, rightly speaking in praise of the Tathāgata in line with what is factual, would speak...

Remember, Nyom, one having developed right view, one with Sila, for such is no will needed to gain liberation. The Buddha encourages to enter the school, to strive for the next grade. Once on a certain path, once right resolve is taken, there is not that much to encourage further. The hard is to enter, because it requires to leave a current home into a unknown, homeless.

Children with much conceit are hard to move to school, because they fear to be not perfect any more there in the homeless. Thinking schol is only for those who can write and read already. So they prefer to say "I can not write" and hold their stand within those not after it. Fearing that others, better, blame then, prefer to dwelk with lower or likewise.

While parents are able to work with promises of sensual pleasures as reward, the Buddha can just server those with the Noble Path who know about the reality of suffering and desire a way out. For one without Dukkha Saddha does not arise.

Although the Buddha and teacher do sometimes tell it, they mostly avoid to praise disciples to much or tell them even that they are already on a secure lane. Why? Because they could get lazy and miss to gain the highest as fast as possible.